I think it's a good idea. Maybe both Ford and Toyota can learn from each other and maybe Ford will start building trucks with better quality again to compete with Toyota in the future. For one, I know that my F-150 was built with thinner metal than ever before to make it lighter; parts were designed to fail, made extremely hard to work on and the parts can only be replaired/replaced with special tools so that you have to take it back to the dealer (or spend a fortune in Ford specifically designed tools) to get it fixed. I believe that this was well thought out by Ford executives to keep Ford's head above water during the bad economy. What Ford doesn't seem to realize is that eventually people will stop buying their trucks and go elsewhere, like Toyota, who has been known for their quality. I want to keep buying Ford, but unless things change for the better, I don't know that I will in the future. I hope Ford executives take the time to read these posts, they could learn a lot from them.

 

Just so everyone knows, the way Ford stock offerings are structured, it would be extremely difficult for any outsider to own Ford Motor Company or controlling interest of Ford without the Ford family's consent. Things are structured to insure the Ford family retains control of the company thus making a hostile takeover improbable. And I might also remind everyone that just because a foreign manufacture has plants in the USA, doesn't mean that they pay federal taxes like an all American company would. Where a company is headquartered is where the bulk of the income taxes are paid on the profits. That's why many US corporations such as Tyco have established headquarters in places like Bermuda. So it would be a mistake to believe that Honda, Toyota or any other foreign manufactures pay taxes to the US government like Ford does. They pay their taxes to their Motherland. They do pay their share of state and local taxes after their abatements and incentives expire, however.

 

I'm not a fan of this plan...

 

I use Ford vehicles every day at work and wouldn't trust another other manufacturer when running calls.

 

Though I do agree that exterior metals are thinner than they were once upon a time, I take little issue with that, the only place that would be a problem would be an instance like a hailstorm. And Ford is not the only manufacture to use thinner exterior metals these days, virtually everyone does it, Toyota included.

However I have to disagree with pretty much the rest of you're statement. First thing I would like to point out is the statement you made which is as follows...

(Quote)
''Parts were designed to fail, made extremely hard to work on and the parts can only be repaired/replaced with special tools so that you have to take it back to the dealer (or spend a fortune in Ford specifically designed tools) to get it fixed. I believe that this was well thought out by Ford executives to keep Ford's head above water during the bad economy. What Ford doesn't seem to realize is that eventually people will stop buying their trucks and go elsewhere, like Toyota.''

If you're talking about the 2005 F-150 that is listed as you're truck then it should be know that the economy was actually doing quite good at that time, especially truck sales...Back then Ford was knocking out almost 1,000,000 F-Series trucks a year. Even today Ford regularly does over 500,000 F-Series yearly.

Another thing I think worth bringing up is that Ford's F-Series have been the best selling line of trucks for almost 40 years. That kind of success doesn't come from ''designed to fail parts.'' My family has owned their fair share of Fords. My grandfather had a 2000 F-150 he bought new in 1999 and put 230,000 miles on it without so much as a single hiccup from it. My parents own a 2004 and 2006 F-150, the 2004 has 120,000 miles on it and the 2006 has 66,000 miles on it. Neither of those has faltered in their performance. And I myself currently own a 2011 F-150 FX4 with the new 5.0L V8 and even though its only 4,800miles on it, it's performed flawlessly.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not bashing Toyota. My families owned some damn good Toyotas as well. I don't deny that Toyota makes a quality vehicle albeit a little boring maybe...But quality none the less. But I get the impression that you're putting Toyota up on a pedestal and talking down on Ford without acknowledging the accomplishments Ford has made over the years. Also let it be known that Ford is one of the only American auto manufactures to rank as high as Toyota in the annual quality surveys. So in essence you could say that every Ford is as good as every Toyota or every Toyota is as bad as every Ford.

Lastly...ALL modern cars are a pain to work on once again Toyota included. The days of working on you're own car in your garage are over. Car's today are far beyond you're average Joe mechanic's understanding. Even some auto shops have issues figuring it out when something goes wrong with a new car, hell sometimes even the DEALERS can't properly diagnose issues with new cars, so saying that Ford is designing their vehicles with disposable parts that no one can work on other that Ford really holds no water. Ford is pretty much doing what all other manufactures are doing.

 

^^^^^^^^^very good post i completely agree....there is definatley a reason has been the best selling truck for years and years they simply build the best truck

 

Ford is no doubt the best truck, period. However, Budweiser is also the best selling beer and when I was a drinking man, I thought it tasted like skunk pee.

Great advertising and owner loyalty are huge contributors as well as a small playing field of competitors.

 

I must be hallucinating all the mechanics and hot-rodders I know who do precisely that.

Self and many forum members do most of their own work, sometimes excepting tasks like auto transmission overhaul and machine shop jobs, which were often farmed out back in The Day too.

The days of cars that technophobes who refuse to learn electronics and computers can EASILY work on are pretty much over, but the old ones will be dead soon and that market with them. Modern man has made friends with computers, which are no longer new.

Meanwhile, retail sales of parts and aftermarket gear to DIYers are massive and the variety of available parts/tools/affordable test equipment is far better than it used to be.

 

My point in saying ''The days of working on you're own car in your garage are over'' was that in 1970 you could buy a brand new car or truck and if something went wrong with it...Backwoods billybob with just a little bit of know how and a set of craftsmen tools could get it back into running order without much trouble...Nowadays you take the same backwoods billybob and turn him loose on a 2011/2012 model car...I think you can guess the result...Cars today are for accountable reasons better than cars 40 years ago. 40 years ago cars were pretty unreliable by todays standerds, but in sharp contrast anyone could take a week or so and learn the basics of how to rebuild a carburator. Today it takes an engineer to properly tune a modern EFI system. The benefit though is that the modern EFI system is less prone to failur and requires less maintence.

How many of those ''hotrodders'' actually use brand new computer controlled cars? I know some serious hot rodders and self proclaimed mechanics myself and they all use 20+ year old cars because for one you can get an old car for 500$ and dump 5 or 10 grand into and turn it into a 13 second strip machine. So basically for the price of a brand new ''Economy Car'' you can take a 20 year old Mustang or Camaro and make it a mean 1/4 mile car. I'm not saying brand new cars never get used by the hotrodders...But the majority I've seen are used for promotional purposes by a custom shops with 10s of if not 100s of thousands of dollers worth of tools and computer diagnostics.

I know alot of car people myself...Several of which have brand new or relatively new vehicles as their daily drivers...Not ONE of them does their own work on their new vehicle. Most of them have a trusted mechanic and/or dealership that they rely on to work on their new vehicle. If they do their own work on a car...Its normally a 20+ year old project car.

Let me ask you this...Do you feel totally comfortable that you could take any select 2011/2012 model car totally disassemble the engine and transmission then put it back together in complete working order with tools that your ''average joe'' mechanic has in his garage? Much less do it as easily as you could a 1975 model car?

I'm not a technophobe...But I do believe technology has its place...as does simplicity.

 

This is off topic a bit, like the last several posts, but I just had to chime in... Since OBDII was introduced in '96, I think working on cars has gotten considerably easier. No more trouble shooting. Just read a code and you know exactly what is wrong with said vehicle, and replace the defective part. Almost all electrical parts have pig tails on them, so you don't even have to splice wires. Hard parts get swapped just the same as they were in the past.
Now to bring this back on topic, since I did start this thread and all...
I think Ford has a lot to gain from Toyota. Ford's quality has really improved over the years and I am proud to rub the fact that their initial quality is better than Toyota's (or Chivy's) in their faces. I also believe that hybrid technology is a viable alternative, albeit not the only one, to reduce fuel consumption. If not for environmental reasons, then certainly for economical reasons, mileage in pickups must improve or someday soon Big Brother will make them illegal to build with stricter CAFE standards.
I don't see this as Ford selling out, and I certainly don't think that a partnership with Toyota will hurt them in any way. They have only to gain from this venture. Kudos Ford.

 

I only except the transmission. I worked for a used car lot hence have plenty of practice in all but trans internals, but it's worth noting that transmissions today are throwaways UNLESS you are modding them. Joe mechanic can certainly swap trannies. It's not gotten any harder. We are assuming "average Joe" REAL mechanic and not "average Joe" with a small toolbox who trashed his old-school rides too.

Transmissions are so expensive that repair simply isn't worth the effort even by a fully-equipped shop because wrecks are abundant. If you need a rebuilt one a volume rebuilder can do it and have it in your hand much faster, and they have the advantage of plenty of cores and large parts bench stock. I wouldn't do one if the parts and tools were free other than for personal entertainment and skill advancement.

Some salvage yards specialize in very low-mileage wrecks to feed this growing market.

I'll stick with the used car lot method. Buy one wrecked F150 (for example) for say 800 bucks, loot it for parts to fix two or more others, then off to the crusher. Retail parts prices are the real barrier to (some) advanced home repair, but organ donors are the way around most of that JUST AS THEY ARE FOR A BUSINESS.

Bubba in my neck of the woods does the same thing. Putting the organ donors in back of the trailer is a sign of decorum.

 

Stephen, my experience has been that with OBD-II you don't just plug in a new part and you are good to go. If the job is to be done properly the 1st time you follow the diagnostic procedure in the shop manual before replacing anything to make sure that you have cured the problem and not just put a band-aid on it. The plug and play method of auto repair is probably the leading reason that a vehicle needs to go back in the shop for a second time for the same symptom. Too many service departments use the plug and play method because in many cases it adds to profits if another diagnostic fee is charged. The average person isn't educated enough to question this practice so as a result they are overcharged for the repair. If a shop does things right the 1st time and is honest with their cutomers they will have more business than they can handle and be extremely profitable.

 

Isn't the use of thinner metal because of crumple zones as well as weight issues? Crumple zones are built in so things bend instead of all the energy of a crash going straight to the driver.

 

The exterior sheet thickness doesn't have that much to do with crumple zones. It's used for weight reduction and the ease of shaping in the presses from a flat piece of sheet steel. Thinner steel can be used now because of the advances made in anti-corrosiveness of the steel. The structural areas of a vehicle use various shapes and thicknesses of material to form the crumple zones. Those would include inner fender panels, frame rails, and such. A lot of those dimples u see in an inner panel are for crumple zones. They are there to direct how a section of a vehicle would collapse in the event of collision. This isn't exactly new technology, either. I remember in the early 60's that SAAB used that structural design and touted it in all company literature and advertisements. Most of the European automakers used that technology back in the day, especially the upscale ones like Mercedes.

 

Also some of the people in our diesel crowd have also done things to perpetuate that ideology that the diesel engine is a smoke belching, noisy monstrosity. Slowness of the vehicle has a lot more variables to it.

It's only going to get costlier to own/operate a diesel engine. So much so that unless you are making money using it, it isn't going to make sense to own one, if costs are an issue and with most people on these boards costs do affect them one way or the other. At least they give that impression in their posts, if it's true or not is another thing.